Lakhasly

Research Summary The study addresses one of the important topics in semantics, which is minor derivation, represented here by the justification of naming.Among them: I disagreed with Ibn Sidah in all the explanations he rejected for the naming of things, as their validity was established in their respective sections, except for his rejection of the explanation for the naming of Tayy (that they were the first to cover the watering places), his rejection of the explanation for the naming of the bird of prey (that it sings at night), and his rejection of the explanation for the naming of the bird of prey (that it sings at night), referring to birds of prey because they hide in the earth.The nature of the study necessitated that the research be structured into an introduction, a preface, and three main sections: the first addresses the justifications for naming that Ibn Sidah rejected concerning the thing itself; the second addresses the justifications for naming that Ibn Sidah rejected concerning the relationship of the thing to something else; and the third addresses the justifications for naming that Ibn Sidah rejected concerning morphological forms.Among them: The criteria Ibn Sidah established for rejecting the explanations for naming things include, in general, contradiction of reality, incorrect derivation of the name, and transmission from an unreliable source.c) Verifying information from linguists and consulting their works to avoid attributing to them what they did not write, as Ibn Sidah did by attributing to Ibn Duraid the derivation of 'bardhun' (meaning a man's gait) from the verb 'bardhan' (meaning to become heavy).Linguists have been concerned with studying the justification of naming, and among the most prominent of the ancient linguists who studied it was Ibn Sidah (d. 458 AH) in his dictionary Al-Muhkam and Al-Muhit Al-A'zam.Keywords: Ibn Sidah - Explanations - Naming - Definitive - Descriptive - Analytical.

Research Summary
The study addresses one of the important topics in semantics, which is minor derivation, represented here by the justification of naming. This involves searching for the reason for naming things, meaning tracing them back to the origin from which they came. Linguists have been concerned with studying the justification of naming, and among the most prominent of the ancient linguists who studied it was Ibn Sidah (d. 458 AH) in his dictionary Al-Muhkam and Al-Muhit Al-A'zam. I noticed that he refutes some justifications for naming in his dictionary, so I wanted to conduct research that sheds light on his refusal of those justifications. To determine the validity of Ibn Sidah's approach, the research was titled:

"The Justifications for Naming Rejected by Ibn Sidah (d. 458 AH) in his Muhkam: A Descriptive and Analytical Study." The nature of the study necessitated that the research be structured into an introduction, a preface, and three main sections: the first addresses the justifications for naming that Ibn Sidah rejected concerning the thing itself; the second addresses the justifications for naming that Ibn Sidah rejected concerning the relationship of the thing to something else; and the third addresses the justifications for naming that Ibn Sidah rejected concerning morphological forms.

Following these three sections comes the conclusion of the research, one of its most important findings being that Ibn Sidah and his Muhkam have a firm foundation in linguistic studies in general, and semantic studies in particular.

Another finding is that Ibn Sidah's rejection of the justifications for naming certain names does not necessarily negate the validity of the justifications altogether; rather, they may be valid.

Among them: I disagreed with Ibn Sidah in all the explanations he rejected for the naming of things, as their validity was established in their respective sections, except for his rejection of the explanation for the naming of Tayy (that they were the first to cover the watering places), his rejection of the explanation for the naming of the bird of prey (that it sings at night), and his rejection of the explanation for the naming of the bird of prey (that it sings at night), referring to birds of prey because they hide in the earth. The validity of his rejection of these explanations was evident.

Among them: The criteria Ibn Sidah established for rejecting the explanations for naming things include, in general, contradiction of reality, incorrect derivation of the name, and transmission from an unreliable source.

Among them: I believe that the guidelines that should be observed in studying the reasons for naming, both in terms of acceptance and rejection, can be summarized as follows: a) Considering the perspective of the person naming at the time of the naming.

b) Considering that a name may have more than one explanation, such as the derivation of the word 'ayranah (meaning a strong, energetic camel) from the lion's energy and from the wild donkey's strength.

c) Verifying information from linguists and consulting their works to avoid attributing to them what they did not write, as Ibn Sidah did by attributing to Ibn Duraid the derivation of 'bardhun' (meaning a man's gait) from the verb 'bardhan' (meaning to become heavy).

d) Relying on the core root of the word whose name is being explained.

e) Considering the earlier root as the basis for explaining the name of the subsequent word, such as considering 'bardhun' as the root for 'bardhan' (meaning a man's gait), based on the preparation of the universe and everything in it—sky, earth, and creatures (like the 'bardhun')—to receive humankind.

These guidelines can be further developed from the criteria mentioned by Ibn Sidah.

Following the conclusion are the bibliography and the index of subjects. Keywords: Ibn Sidah - Explanations - Naming - Definitive - Descriptive - Analytical.